View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
JCK
Joined: 15 Feb 2007 Posts: 559
|
|
Back to top |
|
 |
balor123
Joined: 08 Mar 2008 Posts: 1204
|
Posted: Thu Jun 11, 2009 2:47 am GMT Post subject: |
|
|
"Properties in several areas are selling for less than they did 20 years ago"
In my head, when something is older it should be worth less. Why should my 2001 Honda Accord be worth as much as a new 2009 Honda Accord? |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
JCK
Joined: 15 Feb 2007 Posts: 559
|
Posted: Thu Jun 11, 2009 1:08 pm GMT Post subject: |
|
|
The land is worth something in a property, even if the physical structure has deteriorated.
Not quite the same as a car... |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
balor123
Joined: 08 Mar 2008 Posts: 1204
|
Posted: Thu Jun 11, 2009 2:12 pm GMT Post subject: |
|
|
Yeah so the land should appreciate while the building depreciates. In a place where the combined sold for $120k in 1989 dollars, the land isn't worth very much so the net should be negative. Coming from Boston where you pay $350k for a lot and $70k for a house, we don't understand this well but in many parts of the country this is the case, especially if you don't keep putting money into the house. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
JCK
Joined: 15 Feb 2007 Posts: 559
|
Posted: Thu Jun 11, 2009 3:02 pm GMT Post subject: |
|
|
balor123 wrote: | Yeah so the land should appreciate while the building depreciates. In a place where the combined sold for $120k in 1989 dollars, the land isn't worth very much so the net should be negative. Coming from Boston where you pay $350k for a lot and $70k for a house, we don't understand this well but in many parts of the country this is the case, especially if you don't keep putting money into the house. |
Well, given the way prices have gone in CA, I guess you're right! |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
Guest
|
Posted: Fri Jun 12, 2009 3:14 pm GMT Post subject: |
|
|
The Building get older but price not goes down, that is becasue the value of dollar is going way down. Stagflation will kill you in any way you can think of. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
|